Thoughts on Life, Love, Politics, Hypocrisy and Coming Out in Mid-Life

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Former Defense Department and CIA Officials Slam Trump

The previous post noted how Hitler's rise to power was aided by sycophants who thought they could control him and/or by those who put personal advancement ahead of the best interests of the nation. Some of the later ended up losing their lives when Hitler turned on them and others lost everything when Germany was crushed in defeat. Thankfully, some of America's career defense and intelligence are not ready to sell out the nation for a few pieces of silver and put the interests of the nation first. A column in the Washington Post by a former undersecretary of defense for intelligence from
2011 to 2015 and assistant secretary of defense for special operations from 2007 to 2011, and former deputy director of the CIA underscores why Donald Trump is unfit for the office of the presidency and the danger that he poses for America. Here are excerpts:

Donald Trump
showed again during Monday’s presidential debate the many ways in which he is
unfit to be president. But nowhere did he reveal himself to be as
temperamentally unfit, unserious, unprepared and incoherent as he did on the
topic of national security.

Trump continued to question the global alliance system that
has served U.S. national security interests so well since World War II. He
continues to see our relationships with our closest allies and partners solely
in terms of cost — who is paying how much of the bill. He does not see all the
benefits that have accrued to the United States from this system, including the
stability of Europe and East Asia that has made this a more secure and
prosperous nation.

Trump spoke off
the cuff about the most important responsibility of our commander in chief:
U.S. nuclear weapons policy. Apparently unaware of the meaning of the words,he first saidhe believed in “no first use” of nuclear weapons, then contradicted himself by
saying he would keep his options open as president. One of us (Michael Vickers)
had oversight for U.S. nuclear weapons policy during the George W. Bush
administration, and we can say unequivocally that absolute clarity is critical
to the strength of our nuclear deterrent. And these comments come on top of
Trump’s already-reckless pattern of remarks on allowing more countries to
obtain nuclear weapons and the potential scenarios in which he would consider
using such weapons.

Trump failed to articulate a plan to defeat the Islamic
State, and he baldly lied about initially opposing the Iraq War. He continued
his silly argument that to talk about his plan would give away secrets to the
enemy. Nonsense. As two people who fought terrorists for almost two decades, we
can assure Trump that offering the broad outlines of a policy gives nothing
away.

Trump
has repeatedly claimed on the campaign trail, as he did again Monday night,
that the United States would have prevented the emergence of the Islamic State
if we had “taken the oil” in the aftermath of the Iraq War. Trump is apparently
unaware that the terrorist group got its oil from fields in Syria, not Iraq.
Trump likewise dubiously asserted that had the United States maintained 10,000
troops in Iraq after 2011 — against the wishes of the Iraqi government — it
would have prevented the Islamic State from becoming a threat. Again, Trump is
seemingly unaware of the facts. The Islamic State’s most rapid growth occurred
when it crossed the border into Syria, where most of its forces remain today.

And Trump was
not serious when he was discussing one of the most significant threats of our
time: cyber. In discussing Russia’s possible involvement in the recent hack of
the Democratic National Committee, he posited that a 400-pound person sitting
on a bed could have been responsible. It is highly unlikely that a lone hacker
conducted this attack. Trump did not want to admit that the most likely culprit
was Russian President Vladimir Putin, whom Trump actuallyencouraged to conduct cyber espionageagainst his opponent, Hillary Clinton.

As bad as he was on the issues, Trump was even worse on
temperament and style. He was clearly not prepared for the debate, rambling
through answers with many digressions that had nothing to do with what he was
asked or even the point he was trying to make.

If
Donald Trump thinks preparation is overrated and that a seat-of-the-pants
approach makes sense for the most important debate of his life, why do we think
he would treat meetings in the White House Situation Room any differently?

Trump is not only a threat to America but to the world at large. No wonder so many of America's allies are worried about the outcome of November's election. I find the thought of Trump in the White House nothing short of terrifying.

1 comment:

Not surprisingly, there were over 900 comments on the Washington Post article.

Of course, there's a limit to how much one can write at one time, but it should be worth noting that although the nuclear triad has been part of our lives since the Eisenhower Administration, and although the piece of trump claims to have gone to a high school military academy, he was ignorant of what the "nuclear triad" -- the central, primary, vital (enough emphasis) core of our national defense strategy -- is. After all, the piece of trump DID live through the Cuban missile crisis -- and the Ronald Rotten administration.

And it is rather odd that his campaign manager on the Putin payroll had not mentioned to him that his BFF Putin had already invaded Ukraine -- two years before he told Stephanopoulos that his bosom buddy wasn't going to.

Translate This Page

Contact Me to Order Title Work

LGBT Legal Services

About Me

Out gay attorney in a committed relationship; formerly married and father of three wonderful children; sometime activist and political/news junkie; survived coming out in mid-life and hope to share my experiences and reflections with others.
In the career/professional realm, I am affiliated with Caplan & Associates PC where I practice in the areas of real estate, estate planning (Wills, Trusts, Advanced Medical Directives, Financial Powers of Attorney, Durable Medical Powers of Attorney); business law and commercial transactions; formation of corporations and limited liability companies and legal services to the gay, lesbian and transgender community, including birth certificate amendment.

Disclaimer on Opinions and Content

This Blog contains content that may be innapropriate for readers under the legal age of 18. IF YOU ARE UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE, PLEASE LEAVE NOW. Thank you

This is an opinion and commentary blog and the opinions and contents of this Blog - including opinions expressed concerning opponents of LGBT equality - are the opinions only of the individual blogger and should not be attributed to any other individuals or to any organization of which the blogger is a past or current member.

Followers

PLU Top Gay Blogs

Michael-in-Norfolk disclaims any and all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, completeness, legality, reliability, operability, or availability of information or material displayed on this site and does not claim credit for any images or articles featured on this site, unless otherwise noted. All visual content is copyrighted to it's respectful owners. Information on this site may contain errors or inaccuracies, and Michael-in-Norfolk does not make warranty as to the correctness or reliability of the site's content. If you own rights to any of the images or articles, and do not wish them to appear on this site, please contact Michael-in-Norfolk via e-mail and they will be promptly removed. Michael-in-Norfolk contains links to other Internet sites. These links are provided solely as a convenience and are not endorsements of any products or services in such sites, and no information or content in such site has been endorsed or approved by this blog.